https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022584 --- Comment #2 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> --- 0. Not critizing, just trying to understand. Why are those packages split out from qpid-cpp? 1. Those %globals at the top are probably not required, unless you're targetting EPEL5. 2. python-devel requires python, so BR:python is not necessary. 3. %defattr is not needed. 4. %clean section is not necessary, likewise empty %check. 5. Can you restructure the spec file to have normal structure: %package, %description, %prep, %build, %install, %post, %files... 6. Can you extend the %description a bit? "management" — for what?, etc. 7. Change BR: phyton-devel to python2-devel 8. Note: No known owner of /usr/share/doc/qpid-qmf-0.24 9. Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/include/qmf(qpid-cpp- client-devel), /usr/include/qmf/engine(qpid-cpp-client-devel) Since there's a dependency on those packages anyway, maybe there's no need to own those directories. 10. Dist tag is missing. qpid-qmf.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/libqmfengine.so qpid-qmf.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/libqmfconsole.so qpid-qmf.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/libqmf2.so qpid-qmf.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/libqmf.so 11. qpid-qmf-devel requires pkgconfig. I think this can be filtered out: %global __requires_exclude pkg-config 12. Docs ended up in a versioned directory: /usr/share/doc/qpid-qmf-0.24/LICENSE /usr/share/doc/qpid-qmf-0.24/NOTICE That's it, for now. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review